Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
to commonsense and bipartisan action. harry reid says senate democrats will soon vote on a plan to temporarily replace the harsh austerity of the sequester. the question is if a deal is made in the run-up to the sequester deadline, who is going to be making it at this point? >> well, it's mcconnell and the president, and whatever mcconnell starts complaining about the president campaigning, that's kind of, you know, his way of saying that i'm not doing so well here. he hates it when the president goes out and says, you know, would you rather cut f.a.a. or would you rather close a few loopholes for billionaires because it's so bad for him. it just doesn't work for them. the same dynamic will prevail during the fiscal cliff. if mcconnell and obama can get together and cut a deal, then it will be jammed somehow or another through the house and we'll talk more about how is boehner's speakership in jeopardy, et cetera, et cetera? >> i mean, is mcconnell going to come to the table, harold ford jr.? he is at risk of a possible primary in 2014 and -- sorry, that's lindsey graham that is at risk of a p
a, quote, filibuster. it won't be a filibuster, but they're forcing harry reid to basically go and get 60 votes to confirm hagel. >> why is that? >> why are they doing it? >> why the change? why the change of heart? >> well, i think mccain has gone back and forth. i think at the beginning he suggested that he might try to block hagel's nomination. then he defended him the other day when the criticism really got out of bounds. and now he's back to saying he may try to block it. but it feels like reid will get his 60 votes. >> he's going to, but willie, they keep going back to benghazi. by the way, listen, we've said here clearly the white house screwed up, the state department screwed up, it was hillary clinton's low point. they asked for security in benghazi. they didn't get it. the ambassador asked for help. he didn't get it. what does that have to do with chuck hagel? >> well, john mccain has been trying to get answers from the white house about benghazi. i think he sees this as a moment of leverage now. he can hold this up. he's got a bunch of republican senators who will fo
, " press here for a message from senator king." [laughter] the bad news is, it was in harry reid's handwriting. [laughter] listen, the message is really simple. we have got to start talking to each other, solving problems, we have got to get rid of the ideology and you have got to be fired up to make it happen. the forces of division are fired up. the forces that want to pull us apart and put us into categories are fired up. there has to be support for people who want to solve problems, who want to tell the truth, who want to work a five- day week, who want to do the things that we need to do to get this country going. it is what is on the minds of the public. i was the only candidate in the country where people had a real choice. if you stop and think about it, your choices are determined by the parties by large. in maine, people had a third choice. my favorite comment from the whole state was that people came up to me and said all my life, i wanted a chance to vote for none of the above. and you are it. [laughter] [applause] but the point is, people are more interested in solvi
john boehner talking to the president or mitch mcconnell talking to the vice president or harry reid, there's a few people at the top trying to make these decisions thinking we should all fall. there's little reach the bottom to find out where we are coming from and it's based on seniority. that hasn't worked well. we haven't been able to fix much with that type of attitude so i know when we reach out and have 25, 30 of us and we are reaching across the aisle malae -- i will give you a perfect example. we had a problem with revenue and people said we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. we have people on the other side saying we don't spending problem, we have a revenue problem. they are both right and they are both wrong. how do we get people on the other side if a republican says i don't want any more revenue but they said it might not be that it's just i don't like the way that you spend the money and the democrats say okay. can we come to an agreement? if we vote to have revenue and also you are asking me as a democrat if we have new revenue can you spend it
york times." he begins with these words. on july 26, 2011, jack lew went to harry read's budget for a session. according to bob woodward's book, they came up with a trigger idea to force a budget deal. what's the idea, reid asked? sequestration, lew said. reid folded himself over with his head between his knees as if he was going to throw up. here's the question. if this is such a horrible idea, sequestration or these forced budget cuts, why did the white house come up with this idea to begin with? >> well, as you remember, wolf, in the summer of 2011, we were facing a situation where the nation was about to default for the first time in its history because republicans were refusing to agree to a balanced approach to a deficit reduction. both sides were looking for a way to craft a deal that would avoid default and a trigger mechanism. sequestration, which is a word that most americans have never heard before, is simply a way of crafting policy that was so onerous that would cause cuts that nobody liked, republicans or democrats, and because of that they would compel the prospec
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)